269 réponses à ce sujet

[failedparachute]

To be honest, I had doubts about the direction ME3 was heading since I played Arrival last year. I hated the fact that the decision to destroy the Relay was taken out of the player's hands, when other large decisions, like exterminating the Rachni, and saving the Reaper base were given to the player. I can forgive it since, probably for the ease of the development, Bioware needed the player to start somewhere, and they wanted to give Shepard a view of Earth, to remind both the character and the player of what they were fighting for. Overall though, I was utterly surprised at how little freedom they decided to give the player in terms of the dialogue options. Entire minutes play out without the player being able to actually SAY anything, where in previous games, particularly the first, the player chooses EVERY response Shepard makes. Shepard's words are the player's. In the third, they belong more to Shepard than the player.

My thoughts on Thessia are torn. I like how Bioware made the situation feel so desperate, yet at the same time the "boss fight" with Kai Leng was utterly disappointing and aggravating to me. I didn't feel like I lost a "good" fight, I felt cheated out of one. Same with the chase scene on Mars. I can think of ways to make the Mars one interesting, Eva taking battle damage as the player hurt her perhaps hinting at her synthetics before it was properly revealed. Or even if the player was good enough, revealing it then and there. But that's Mars.

Thessia is probably the trickier of the two to pull off well. I have a hard time coming up with an idea that doesn't have Cut-Scene Incompetance at some level, aside from making Kai Leng ridiculously overpowered to the point where it might as well be a cut-scene. I'd be curious if any of you have thoughts on how you would pull off "defeating Shepard."

Honestly, I agree that the Kid somehow being more traumatic to Shepard than losing teammates (or Love Interests!) is really out of character. Furthermore, I feel like the dream-sequences could have been much better, particularly if Shepard had to face those he lost, instead of just getting whispers from time to time. Imagine the accusations, "We believed in you Shepard. You let us down. You killed us." Even give Shepard a chance to defend himself, "I did what I had to do" vs. "I'm sorry." All in all, while I enjoyed many of the character moments in ME3, too many lacked the depth I had come to expect.

Ultimately, though I feel the dream sequences and ventkid are a means to an end. I am referring specifically to the Indoctrination theory here, as the more I look at it the more it makes sense. I've been examining it under the context of "If I were going to Indoctrinate Shepard, how would I do it?" I'd have subtle hints at it, the "Would You Kindly?" so to speak are there. Some are obvious, such as ventkid not interacting with anyone aside from Shepard and the dreams (note the timing; all occur after some proximity to Reapers), but I'd want something more...teammates noticing and commenting on the changes in Shepard. But then, Joker, Liara, Garrus, and most other love interests do at one point or another comment on Shepard's stress level. Even a seemingly innocuous comment by James Vega "Does anyone else hear that hum?" points to the effects of Reaper Indoctrination, as most of the Eden Prime survivors comment on the auditory attack. Indoctrination is one sure-fire way to explain why Shepard is acting out of character, while removing choice from the player.

The signs are there all along, the Reveal, however, is not, and left up to the player to infer. Furthermore, aspects of the level design and the final choice itself serve not just to Indoctrinate Shepard, but the player as well. Two of the options leave the Reapers alive, the Destroy option is given the "Renegade" treatment, while Control is given the "Paragon" colors. We're told that the Destroying the Reapers will take EDI and the geth with it, something that many (myself included) would hesitate to do. There's the manipulation to feel that synthesis is the "best" option, but when you stop to think about it, just how is synthesis between synthetics and organics represented in the series? The answer should be obvious: the Reapers.

Extrapolatiing further still, the Kid himself could be a way to Indoctrinate the player. How many times have we as players and people seen the "death of child/lost toy in a warzone" trope. We see the kid, and we think "It's a clichéd attempt to make us feel emotion," and that disconnect is what distracts us from the true purpose of his existence: the warning sign that Shepard is becoming Indoctrinated.

So all in all, I believe that the Child is a symptom of Reaper Indoctrination, though I also feel that the execution is lacking. Everything feels too deliberate on the part of the writers for it to be just bad, and nothing more. And perhaps the largest part of that is the lack of resolution in the current ending.

...Man this turned out longer than I thought...

[malra]

Ashilana wrote...

I "won" that fight swiftly so the disconnect with the cutscene defeat wasn't as shocking for me.  My boyfriend on the other hand was playing a vanguard and lost several times.  When he finally won...his anger was palpable.

I think you are onto something important here, that moment was a huge narrative failure.  Shep is supposed to be upset at failing...but as a player you know you could never have won, so you don't care.

Thessia was a let down on multiple levels, when Shepard falls the game is practically screaming at the player "foreshadowing event".  I actually had the same reaction here that I had with the husks at the end.  I beat Leng down and the next thing I know he's speaking to himself about healing and I was thinking "why is my western style ME3 suddenly a JRPG" then crap I was dead.

So this proves your point, I knew the only reason I lost was the gunship and the fight was rigged so I couldn't have cared less well except to be angry, after that it was all down hill and became "harmonic disonance".  I should have known at the beginning though, when the manufactured Liara is on Mars thing was a dead give away there wasn't going to be anything subtle in this game.

[hammerfan]

Ventkid & the nightmares (ooh there's a band name waiting to happen) we're too contrived for me, and ny SHep wouldn't have reacted that way. Thessia, however, is where the narrative started to really fall apart for me and the Kai Leng non-fight at the end of it was just silly.

[malra]

VigilancePress wrote...

Brilliant observation, OP!

-snipped-
For instance, it would be great for our Love Interest to chat us up about our nightmares ("Something's bothering you, what is it?"). That would give us the opportunity to explain our reaction to these sequences in the way *we* want our Shep to experience them. A Renegade might question his attachment to the dreams, or the meaning of the child's presence, while a Paragon might question her sanity or her ability to save the Earth.

Or just somebody....after the first one I kept expecting somebody to be in the hall to talk to me.  On a small scale, this is an excellent example of  the many moments that felt like they were supposed to be really big or really mean something but then nothing ever happened so those moments just become meaningless and lost amid all the other lets manipulate the players emotions moments.

[Shezo]

Yeah, pretty much game takes away too much of player freedom -- this forced emotions only a tip of the iceberg.
It doesn't even gives us illusionary freedom like in me 1, when different responses lead to same consequence. Because it _matters_, at least on emotional level. That's very important thing.
For example, at the Mars scene, when VS starts ****ing about you and cerberus, i counted around 3 or 4 possibilities for dialog wheel, but game gave me only one "wheel" or so, and it's not 3 answer wheel, but 2 only.

This whole tread is sad because people say true things.

[VigilancePress]

failedparachute: Agreed on all counts.

The longer I pick at the frayed ending to Mass Effect 3, the more the whole story begins to unravel.

This was so clearly written with the idea of telling a single character's story... instead of allowing the player to determine who that character was. This is soooo different from ME 1 and even most of ME 2.

Thessia was indeed a really sore point for me. I was so busy trying to take Kai Len down that I didn't realize his health bar wasn't getting any shorter, while the other foes were still attacking us. If there's one thing I can't *stand* in RPGs, it's plot-armored foes. If you're not going to let me kill something, don't make me fight it.

[MegumiAzusa]

VigilancePress wrote...

Brilliant observation, OP!

If the dreams had been truly interactive, allowing me to express *my* Shepard's emotions the way I wanted to, they would have been far better. A Renegade Shepard's dreams would be completely different from a Paragon's. This is one of the huge disconnects between the first two games and the third game. It establishes your psyche as being the same, no matter what kind of character you play, which is absurd in the extreme. This is a glaring problem with the narrative, unless the dreams are being imposed on Shepard as part of 'Indoctrination'... in which case, we should have some scene in there that explains our reaction to them.

For instance, it would be great for our Love Interest to chat us up about our nightmares ("Something's bothering you, what is it?"). That would give us the opportunity to explain our reaction to these sequences in the way *we* want our Shep to experience them. A Renegade might question his attachment to the dreams, or the meaning of the child's presence, while a Paragon might question her sanity or her ability to save the Earth.

If the IT holds true one could argue that because of the subtle mind control you can't react in another way. You feel something is wrong but you can't express it.

failedparachute wrote...

To be honest, I had doubts about
the direction ME3 was heading since I played Arrival last year. I hated
the fact that the decision to destroy the Relay was taken out of the
player's hands, when other large decisions, like exterminating the
Rachni, and saving the Reaper base were given to the player.

No, this is completely justified. There is no choice in this. The galaxy is in no way ready for the Reapers and Shep knows that. You simply cannot choose not to destroy the relay as there is no way for the galaxy to defeat them in the then current state.

Modifié par MegumiAzusa, 01 avril 2012 - 04:56 .

[hammerfan]

VigilancePress wrote...

 If there's one thing I can't *stand* in RPGs, it's plot-armored foes. If you're not going to let me kill something, don't make me fight it.

QFT

[GetDaved]

The kid is a symbol for Earth, and is given emphasis to put a face on the mass-suffering on Earth. Bioware is ripping off the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List. If you just saw people dying left and right it wouldn't feel as personal as seeing an individual with a face. The kid represents Shepard's guilt over leaving, and his pain over the destruction of the earth, and is the face of everyone who died on earth.

Granted I think they kind of crapped all over it with the Catalyst-child as it turned into bizarre emotional manipulation and an intellectual crapstorm... but prior to that it was good. Maybe there was a disconnect because Shepard was having thoughts of his own and prior to this was always an avatar of the player, but I was cool with it.

[malra]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

-snipped-
No, this is completely justified. There is no choice in this. The galaxy is in no way ready for the Reapers and Shep knows that. You simply cannot choose not to destroy the relay as there is no way for the galaxy to defeat them in the then current state.

Question, why is the galaxy not ready to defeat them in its then current state as opposed to the one in ME3?  This is just one more point to the whole story telling debacle.  ME1 makes pretty clear that the reason the reapers use the citadel is like a lure, once civilizations progress far enough to reach a certain point, they are then easy pickings because the government of galactic civilizations always base themselves on the citadel.  Reapers wipe out government, wiping out infrastructure, then pick the leftovers off.  Its like somewhere between ME1 and ME3 they forgot they ever wrote this.  Its not that galactic civilization could never beat the reapers, its that the reapers won through guerilla warfare. so a united or even partially united galaxy wins that can maintain some sort of infrastructure or rallying point, i.e. Shepard.

[failedparachute]

malra wrote...

VigilancePress wrote...

Brilliant observation, OP!

-snipped-
For instance, it would be great for our Love Interest to chat us up about our nightmares ("Something's bothering you, what is it?"). That would give us the opportunity to explain our reaction to these sequences in the way *we* want our Shep to experience them. A Renegade might question his attachment to the dreams, or the meaning of the child's presence, while a Paragon might question her sanity or her ability to save the Earth.

Or just somebody....after the first one I kept expecting somebody to be in the hall to talk to me.  On a small scale, this is an excellent example of  the many moments that felt like they were supposed to be really big or really mean something but then nothing ever happened so those moments just become meaningless and lost amid all the other lets manipulate the players emotions moments.

Here's what happens right after the first dream (it's from my first playthrough which I did an LP of):

The scene happens at 17:15

Liara notices Shepard is upset, and asks him about it. Granted he doesn't speak of the dream specifically, but he can choose to open up or deflect there. There's also another scene where Shepard specifically mentions the Kid to Garrus and how he wasn't able to save him.

Scene happens at 5:50 into the video.

The interactions are there, though they lack the depth you want.

[malra]

GetDaved wrote...

The kid is a symbol for Earth, and is given emphasis to put a face on the mass-suffering on Earth. Bioware is ripping off the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List. If you just saw people dying left and right it wouldn't feel as personal as seeing an individual with a face. The kid represents Shepard's guilt over leaving, and his pain over the destruction of the earth, and is the face of everyone who died on earth.

Granted I think they kind of crapped all over it with the Catalyst-child as it turned into bizarre emotional manipulation and an intellectual crapstorm... but prior to that it was good. Maybe there was a disconnect because Shepard was having thoughts of his own and prior to this was always an avatar of the player, but I was cool with it.

Actually I felt a lot worse for the chick at the Assari embassy trying to get her kids to Thessia than I did for that kid in the vent.  I felt even worse for her, after I'd been to Thessia and seen it totaly anihalated after she finally gets the okay to send her kid there.  Of course, then her pogrammin loop didn't update and even though Thessia is totally a washout because of the Reapers she is still at the embassy trying to send her kid there.  So then I pretty much hated her.

[malra]

failedparachute wrote...

The interactions are there, though they lack the depth you want.

Thanks.  The one with Liara I got on my maleshep play through I think, but I never got the Garrus one (-edited- or at least I don't remember it).  There both sort of perfuctory though aren't they and with Garrus he only mentions the kid dying doesn't say anything about the dreams.

Modifié par malra, 01 avril 2012 - 05:14 .

[VigilancePress]

malra wrote...

GetDaved wrote...

The kid is a symbol for Earth, and is given emphasis to put a face on the mass-suffering on Earth. Bioware is ripping off the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List. If you just saw people dying left and right it wouldn't feel as personal as seeing an individual with a face. The kid represents Shepard's guilt over leaving, and his pain over the destruction of the earth, and is the face of everyone who died on earth.

Granted I think they kind of crapped all over it with the Catalyst-child as it turned into bizarre emotional manipulation and an intellectual crapstorm... but prior to that it was good. Maybe there was a disconnect because Shepard was having thoughts of his own and prior to this was always an avatar of the player, but I was cool with it.

Actually I felt a lot worse for the chick at the Assari embassy trying to get her kids to Thessia than I did for that kid in the vent.  I felt even worse for her, after I'd been to Thessia and seen it totaly anihalated after she finally gets the okay to send her kid there.  Of course, then her pogrammin loop didn't update and even though Thessia is totally a washout because of the Reapers she is still at the embassy trying to send her kid there.  So then I pretty much hated her.

Haha, yeah. I was thinking "Geez, BioWare. Let me warn this lady NOT to send her kid to Thessia! She's safer on the Citadel!" But that was before I had seen the ending. <_<

[The Angry One]

The manipulativeness of the vent kid and the subsequent dreams has annoyed more more and more, to the point that I regard the kid with utter contempt.

His visual similarity to starbaby doesn't help matters either, but the point is I don't care about this kid over the millions who are dying every day. No, sorry. I don't care what he represents. It's forced and vulgar.

[VigilancePress]

failedparachute wrote...

malra wrote...

VigilancePress wrote...

Brilliant observation, OP!

-snipped-
For instance, it would be great for our Love Interest to chat us up about our nightmares ("Something's bothering you, what is it?"). That would give us the opportunity to explain our reaction to these sequences in the way *we* want our Shep to experience them. A Renegade might question his attachment to the dreams, or the meaning of the child's presence, while a Paragon might question her sanity or her ability to save the Earth.

Or just somebody....after the first one I kept expecting somebody to be in the hall to talk to me.  On a small scale, this is an excellent example of  the many moments that felt like they were supposed to be really big or really mean something but then nothing ever happened so those moments just become meaningless and lost amid all the other lets manipulate the players emotions moments.

Here's what happens right after the first dream (it's from my first playthrough which I did an LP of):

The scene happens at 17:15

Liara notices Shepard is upset, and asks him about it. Granted he doesn't speak of the dream specifically, but he can choose to open up or deflect there. There's also another scene where Shepard specifically mentions the Kid to Garrus and how he wasn't able to save him.

Scene happens at 5:50 into the video.

The interactions are there, though they lack the depth you want.

Ah, for some reason I didn't remember seeing these moments... but now that you mention them I remember. The issue with Liara seems especially shallow. For me, she was my love interest, but more than that... she's been in my head since the first game. I mean, wasn't that the whole reason you picked her up? To help you interpret the mental images from the Prothean Beacon? For such an intimate relationship, they keep leaving us with very shallow interactions in general conversation moments.

Modifié par VigilancePress, 01 avril 2012 - 05:17 .

[failedparachute]

malra wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

-snipped-
No, this is completely justified. There is no choice in this. The galaxy is in no way ready for the Reapers and Shep knows that. You simply cannot choose not to destroy the relay as there is no way for the galaxy to defeat them in the then current state.

Question, why is the galaxy not ready to defeat them in its then current state as opposed to the one in ME3?  This is just one more point to the whole story telling debacle.  ME1 makes pretty clear that the reason the reapers use the citadel is like a lure, once civilizations progress far enough to reach a certain point, they are then easy pickings because the government of galactic civilizations always base themselves on the citadel.  Reapers wipe out government, wiping out infrastructure, then pick the leftovers off.  Its like somewhere between ME1 and ME3 they forgot they ever wrote this.  Its not that galactic civilization could never beat the reapers, its that the reapers won through guerilla warfare. so a united or even partially united galaxy wins that can maintain some sort of infrastructure or rallying point, i.e. Shepard.

Well, the Protheans sabotaged the Keeper's signal preventing Sovereign from activating the Citadel relay and beaming his buddies in. This outcome was probably predicted, and even moving at FTL speeds, the Reapers probably took years reaching our galaxy. They probably began moving when Sovereign detected there was a problem, or failing that, definitely by its destruction by the Citadel/Alliance fleet.

 The Alpha Relay was a backup backdoor, which Shepard destroyed, buying the galaxy a few more months of time to prepare. The Reapers were stuck starting fromt the edges of the galaxy and working inwards, though they did take a special interest in Earth. All of these were delaying tactics. And I find it hard to believe that the Reapers ever needed guerrilla tactics. I imagine it was more systematic, destroying the pockets of the largest resistance, then moving to the next largest, and on down the list, harvesting all the while.

Also, the point I was trying to argue with Arrival was not the necessity of the action, but why we couldn't push the button ourselves.

[Actinguy1]

I agree entirely with the OP. I think the dreams were fine...especially hearing the voices of the men and women we lost...but Thessia and VentKid were both shoved down our throats. I never cared about the kid, who was not well written and was the second worse voice actor (behind Chobot). In the kid's defense, I've never found a kid voice actor that I liked, but whatever. I never felt guilt that he was killed. This is one of the very few deaths throughout the whole series where it WASN'T my fault. I tried to help him, the kid didn't want help. Not my fault.

I also didn't understand why we were all so worried about Thessia. The same tragedy is happening all over the world. Why are the Asari better than everyone else?

One other thing I didn't like...I think it was after a dream sequence, I go into the bathroom to wash my face or something and Liara or Traynor or somebody comes in and asks what's wrong, so I tell them that I miss Kaidan.

I miss Kaidan? I didn't know I missed Kaidan. Frankly, I actively hated Kaidan. No, MY Commander Shepard's biggest regret in his entire life up to that moment was getting young Grunt killed in ME2. I would have liked the opportunity to select in the dialogue wheel which dead character I missed the most. Hell, let me choose, and then put THAT character in the nightmare sequences. That would have been very emotional. That would have made me feel guilty.

If we HAVE to miss Kaidan, at least have us tell that to Ashley, rather than Liara or Traynor or whoever. There would have been some emotion there, since I chose to save Ashley over Kaidan.

They force fake emotion on us in several scenes, and then miss opportunities for real emotion.

[VigilancePress]

They force fake emotion on us in several scenes, and then miss opportunities for real emotion.

Quoted for truth!

[failedparachute]

VigilancePress wrote...

malra wrote...

GetDaved wrote...

The kid is a symbol for Earth, and is given emphasis to put a face on the mass-suffering on Earth. Bioware is ripping off the girl in the red dress from Schindler's List. If you just saw people dying left and right it wouldn't feel as personal as seeing an individual with a face. The kid represents Shepard's guilt over leaving, and his pain over the destruction of the earth, and is the face of everyone who died on earth.

Granted I think they kind of crapped all over it with the Catalyst-child as it turned into bizarre emotional manipulation and an intellectual crapstorm... but prior to that it was good. Maybe there was a disconnect because Shepard was having thoughts of his own and prior to this was always an avatar of the player, but I was cool with it.

Actually I felt a lot worse for the chick at the Assari embassy trying to get her kids to Thessia than I did for that kid in the vent.  I felt even worse for her, after I'd been to Thessia and seen it totaly anihalated after she finally gets the okay to send her kid there.  Of course, then her pogrammin loop didn't update and even though Thessia is totally a washout because of the Reapers she is still at the embassy trying to send her kid there.  So then I pretty much hated her.

Haha, yeah. I was thinking "Geez, BioWare. Let me warn this lady NOT to send her kid to Thessia! She's safer on the Citadel!" But that was before I had seen the ending. <_<

There are a lot of great little moments like that. There's another couple on the Citadel (Normandy's Dock), a turian and an asari, and the turian tells his wife to take the kids to Sanctuary. Of course this is before Shepard's been there, so he can't advise them against it, but even some of this interactions could use more depth. Like the PTSD Asari Commando in the hospital, if you listen to her story, and talk to Joker after Thessia, you find out she killed his sister because she was afraid of being spotted by the Reapers. It would've been nice to tell Joker about that instance and either defuse Joker trying to kill her, or get them both some peace out of it.

Modifié par failedparachute, 01 avril 2012 - 05:23 .

[TemplePhoenix]

Yeah, I can see my 'main' Shep being upset about the kid, but it's hard to imagine my Renegade Shep giving a crap.

Know what would have been cool? If early on in ME3, someone asks your Shep what his/her greatest regret is, and you can choose (Losing the Virmire member, losing the original Normandy, losing someone on the suicide mission, etc.). Then the game bases the nightmares around that. Also, you could have actions to take during the nightmares, and what you do determines whether Shepard remains haunted or rises above them and regains his/her focus.

[MegumiAzusa]

malra wrote...

Question, why is the galaxy not ready to defeat them in its then current state as opposed to the one in ME3?  This is just one more point to the whole story telling debacle.  ME1 makes pretty clear that the reason the reapers use the citadel is like a lure, once civilizations progress far enough to reach a certain point, they are then easy pickings because the government of galactic civilizations always base themselves on the citadel.  Reapers wipe out government, wiping out infrastructure, then pick the leftovers off.  Its like somewhere between ME1 and ME3 they forgot they ever wrote this.  Its not that galactic civilization could never beat the reapers, its that the reapers won through guerilla warfare. so a united or even partially united galaxy wins that can maintain some sort of infrastructure or rallying point, i.e. Shepard.

The beginning of ME3 makes it pretty clear they still aren't ready, even though they had more time. It was pure chance they found the Crucible plans, chance they wouldn't have had if the reapers arrived earlier. At the end of ME3 you can ask Hackett if they could stand against the reapers if the Crucible fails, and the answer is that he doesn't think they can, but they would have to try.
Taking over the Citadel isn't possible anymore in a straight up fight for the Reapers, they can't just send the signal to the Keepers and they take over, thanks to the Protheans. They tried through Cerberus to infiltrate and take over but failed, again by chance. TIM isn't indoctrinated enough at that point to not realize his mistake if Reapers would have arrived shortly after they took over. His only goal was to control them, and if he realizes he failed in that I would grant TIM that he would still act on what he thinks is best for humanity and remedy his failure. They had to let it be.

[The Angry One]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

The beginning of ME3 makes it pretty clear they still aren't ready, even though they had more time. It was pure chance they found the Crucible plans, chance they wouldn't have had if the reapers arrived earlier. At the end of ME3 you can ask Hackett if they could stand against the reapers if the Crucible fails, and the answer is that he doesn't think they can, but they would have to try.

Unfortunate then that the Codex says otherwise, and that it's implied with a little coordination the Reapers could be taken to school.

Taking over the Citadel isn't possible anymore in a straight up fight for the Reapers,

Except when it is?

[Actinguy1]

TemplePhoenix wrote...

Yeah, I can see my 'main' Shep being upset about the kid, but it's hard to imagine my Renegade Shep giving a crap.

Know what would have been cool? If early on in ME3, someone asks your Shep what his/her greatest regret is, and you can choose (Losing the Virmire member, losing the original Normandy, losing someone on the suicide mission, etc.). Then the game bases the nightmares around that. Also, you could have actions to take during the nightmares, and what you do determines whether Shepard remains haunted or rises above them and regains his/her focus.

YES.  This entirely. 

[failedparachute]

Actinguy1 wrote...


One other thing I didn't like...I think it was after a dream sequence, I go into the bathroom to wash my face or something and Liara or Traynor or somebody comes in and asks what's wrong, so I tell them that I miss Kaidan.

I miss Kaidan? I didn't know I missed Kaidan. Frankly, I actively hated Kaidan. No, MY Commander Shepard's biggest regret in his entire life up to that moment was getting young Grunt killed in ME2. I would have liked the opportunity to select in the dialogue wheel which dead character I missed the most. Hell, let me choose, and then put THAT character in the nightmare sequences. That would have been very emotional. That would have made me feel guilty.

If we HAVE to miss Kaidan, at least have us tell that to Ashley, rather than Liara or Traynor or whoever. There would have been some emotion there, since I chose to save Ashley over Kaidan.

They force fake emotion on us in several scenes, and then miss opportunities for real emotion.

I agree with this. Especially since this scene happens right after Tuchanka when Mordin may have made a Heroic Sacrifice or Shepard could've shot him in the back (both of which brought tears to my eyes, though they aren't the only resolutions to that arc). I felt more at peace with the VS's death than the fresh wounds created on Tuchanka. However, stop and think for a minute just how many people Shepard could have lost under his command, and you'll see why they didn't go with more (Ash/Kaiden, Wrex, all the crew of the Normandy save Chakwas, and almost all your team members in two, not to mention some of whom may have been Love Interests). As great as it would be to have the depth here, there's a lot of room for variation.

I suppose one way around that would have been say "If Shepard lost more than 3 team members, have her say, thinking about everyone we lost" and any less than that, name who was lost, but that's still a lot of dialogue that would need to be recorded.